MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3186072067 · doi:10.32370/ia_2021_09_3

Replacing Special Relativity

2021· preprint· en· W3186072067 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
John Hodge

Bibliographic record

VenueIntellectual Archive · 2021
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicEarth Systems and Cosmic Evolution
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTheory of relativityTheoretical physicsTests of special relativityPhysicsSpecial relativityAxiomSpeed of light (cellular automaton)Theory of everything (philosophy)Test theories of special relativityMathematicsFour-forceQuantum mechanicsEpistemologyGeometryPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Special Theory of Relativity applies where gravitation is insignificant. There are many observations that remain poorly explained by the standard models of either the big of cosmology or the small of Quantum mechanics. The strength of the Scalar Theory Of Everything (STOE) is its ability to describe an extremely wide range of observations and to predict observations. Each of the STOE axioms has been used in the development of models of observations in the big and the small. The axioms that replace Special Relativity are: (1) Time is an abstraction of the duration between events causing events. (2) The diameter of the hods is the same throughout the universe. (3) The distance between hods is related to plenum density. Higher reduces the distance between hods. (4) The speed of photons and hods (light) is the greatest of any matter in a given environment. (5) The speed of the plenum wave is much faster than the speed of the hods. The STOE passes the tests of Special Relativity and does much more. The STOE is a major paradigm shift.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.013
Scholarly communication0.0050.013
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0030.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.006

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.191 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIntellectual ArchiveSame topicEarth Systems and Cosmic EvolutionFrench-language works237,207